Differential Association theory

Differential Association theory

According to the theory, Sutherland believes criminal behavior is acquired through social contact with other individuals. He stressed that the behaviors exhibited by people are dependent on the social context in which they are embedded. Notably, the theory was laid out in the form of nine propositions. The pros are such that; the theory is more concerned with the frequency and intensity of interaction; thus, the time an individual is exposed to a particular social context and the time the interaction began plays a crucial role om explaining the criminal activity. The theory can account for the group nature of delinquency. Notably demonstrates the importance of social factors. This is true because, plausibly, criminal behavior can be learned in intimate social groups.

One of the cons of the theory is such that it fails to take into account the specific traits of a person—individual traits sort people into different relationship patterns. People can opt to change their social environment and end up avoiding crime, or they can be in non-criminal influences and still choose to commit a crime.  The theory also fails to account for people’s individual differences since not all persons exposed to criminal influences commit a crime. The theory appears to stereotype people, as evidenced by antisocial definitions being likely to be learned in a low-income neighborhood.  Notably, the role of free will is completely disregarded in choosing not to commit a crime. It is also important to note that the theory has ignored the role of personality.

Social learning theory

Pros

The theory explains an individual social behavior through aspects of differential association, differential reinforcement, imitation, and definitions. Investigation of these aspects deems it possible to be applied to a wider scope. The theory argues that crime is socially learned. While this is true, it also possible to unlearn it. This is through the integration of aspects of reinforcement or punishment. Punishment, for example, leads to the elimination of behavior.

Cons

The theory fails to account for factors that are outside the learning process and have an influence on criminality. Therefore, not all crimes are taken into consideration

Social bond theory

Pros

The theory asserts that crime is a result of a failure in social control. The elements of the social bond include attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. The theory attributes delinquent behavior as a result of these personal bonds becoming weak or broken completely.

Cons

The theory places too much importance on the bonds relative to an individual and society; hence the wider scope is ignored, for example, autonomy and impulsiveness. Also, little or no distinction is made on the importance of each of the elements of the social bonds.

Self-control theory

The cons of the theory are such that the theory generalizes all crimes, whereas there are crimes are typically planned; therefore, this theory is too simple by explaining crimes can be explained by a single tendency of low self-control. The theory also attributes variation of self-control to variation in parental behavior whilst ignoring child effects. Also, downplays the influence of peers.

Neutralization theory

The theory has been broken down into five techniques, precisely the denial of responsibility, denial of injury, condemnation of the condemners, and appeal to higher loyalties. This illustration, with an example, is provided in a clear manner hence easy to understand.  Notably, through the techniques, it is possible to solve a wide range of criminal behaviors.  The theory eliminates the overdetermined image of subcultural values. This is because many delinquents are committed to prosocial values. The techniques of neutralization are viewed as a set of justifications that loosen the morality constraints, therefore, allowing the offenders to get over their antisocial behavior.

The theory is criticized for its assertion that the original causes of delinquent criminal behavior do not matter essentially since more emphasis is given on official labeling. Also, the theory fails to define the origin of the antisocial behavior that is being targeted to be neutralized. It is also not possible.

Differential association theory works best because it is easy to attribute those that commit a crime with the interactions that they have, although the theory fails to take into consideration personal traits. Social learning theory is also of much value such that the theory attributes delinquent behavior in people following their associations with others who engage in crime. Furthermore, the behavior is reinforced, and beliefs that are favorable to crime learned.   The self-control theory defines the lack of self-control as the main factor for criminal behavior. While this is true, the theory is too much generalized and does not take into consideration other factors.